W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2005

[Bug 97] New: new error code descriptions

From: <bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 23:30:39 -0700
Message-Id: <200510120630.j9C6UdNi004321@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97

           Summary: new error code descriptions
           Product: WebDAV-RFC2518-bis
           Version: -07
          Platform: Other
               URL: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-
                    rfc2518bis-07.html#rfc.section.11.6
        OS/Version: other
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: 11.  Use of HTTP Status Codes
        AssignedTo: joe-bugzilla@cursive.net
        ReportedBy: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de
         QAContact: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org


As stated earlier, I think it's a mistake to repeat what other specs already say
normatively. In the best case, it's text duplication. In other case, it just
creates confusion, such as in:

"Any request may contain a conditional header defined in HTTP (If-Match,
If-Modified-Since, etc.) or the "If" conditional header defined in this
specification. If the request contains a conditional header, and if that
condition fails to hold, then this error code may be returned. This status code
is not typically appropriate if the client did not include a conditional header
in the request."

What is the last sentence trying to state here? Does this mean there are cases
where it is appropriate to send a 412 although there was no conditional header?
What case would that be?



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2005 06:30:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:10 GMT